processes
Article
Influence of Insulation Material Thickness on Spread of
Thermal Runaway in Battery Packs
Qinghua Bai 1,2 , Kuining Li 1,2, * , Jianming Zan 3 , Jian Liu 3 , Junfeng Ou 3 and Jiangyan Liu 1,2
Citation: Bai, Q.; Li, K.; Zan, J.; Liu, J.;
Ou, J.; Liu, J. Influence of Insulation
Material Thickness on Spread of
Thermal Runaway in Battery Packs.
Processes 2023, 11, 1321. https://
doi.org/10.3390/pr11051321
Academic Editor: Iztok Golobič
Received: 24 March 2023
Revised: 17 April 2023
Accepted: 20 April 2023
Published: 24 April 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Processes 2023, 11, 1321. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11051321
1 Key Laboratory of Low-Grade Energy Utilization Technologies and Systems, Chongqing University, Ministry
of Education of China, Chongqing 400044, China
2 School of Energy and Power Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China
3 Chongqing Changan Automobile Company Limited, Chongqing 400021, China
* Correspondence: leekn@cqu.edu.cn
Abstract: Thermal runaway occasionally happens in batteries. A single battery, after thermal runaway,
will release heat and transfer it to neighboring batteries, leading to thermal runaway of battery packs.
Thus, it is necessary to explore the diffusion law of thermal runaway in battery modules. Heating is by
far the most common way to trigger thermal runaway propagation of battery modules. In this paper,
experiments and simulations were conducted to explore the influence of different heat insulation
thicknesses on the thermal propagation of lithium iron phosphate batteries, and the result shows that
the best thickness between adjacent batteries is 2 mm. For complex modules, the simulation analysis
shows that when the spacing between adjacent modules in the battery pack was 10 mm and thermal
runaway occurred on one side of the battery pack, it did not occur on the other side for a certain
period of time. Therefore, the recommended spacing between modules in the battery pack is 10 mm.
This lays a foundation for the safe design of battery modules.
Keywords: triggered by heating; thermal runaway; thermal propagation; heat insulation thickness;
lithium iron phosphate battery
1. Introduction
With the energy shortage becoming more and more serious, lithium-ion batteries with
electrochemical energy storage have become the core power technology of electric vehicles
and energy storage systems [1–3]. However, as the lithium-ion battery energy density
has increased significantly, the safety problem of battery modules composed of series and
parallel connections becomes more prominent [4,5]. Mechanical abuse, electricity abuse
and heat abuse will all lead to thermal runaway of batteries, which can lead to battery
module failure and eventually lead to safety accidents [6–9]. At present, to completely
prevent thermal runaway from happening in single batteries is still difficult. Therefore,
the prevention and control of thermal runaway diffusion through group safety design
become key issues to be considered. After thermal runaway occurs in a single battery, how
to restrain the spread of thermal runaway between batteries, such as adding insulation
materials between batteries, increasing the spacing between batteries, etc., is of practical
significance and research value to prevent fire accidents and avoid the occurrence of more
serious damage.
Many researchers have studied thermal runaway and thermal propagation processes
of batteries. Wang et al. [10] used simulations to study the key factors affecting thermal run-
away propagation. Their results showed that reducing the charging rate and environment
temperature and increasing the battery spacing can reduce the possibility of heat propaga-
tion. Li et al. [11] measured the heat transfer flux between adjacent batteries, and a heat flux
test showed that heat conduction strength was significantly greater between batteries with
a shell than those without shells. Hu et al. [12] explored the law of thermal runaway propa-
gation of lithium-ion batteries by experiments and found that 67% of the total heat transfer
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/processes
Processes 2023, 11, 1321 2 of 14

occurs via air conduction, so it is useful to reduce the thermal conductivity of air to delay
the thermal runaway propagation process. Wang et al. [13] explored the main characteristic
parameters affecting the thermal runaway propagation process of batteries. Their study
showed that repeated use of battery modules had little influence on the heat propagation
process of batteries when thermal runaway occurs; a parallel connection mode increased
the probability of thermal runaway propagation of batteries; and SOC significantly affected
the thermal runaway propagation process of batteries. Fang et al. [14] studied the effect of
different states of charge and spacing on vertical thermal runaway propagation between
two cylindrical batteries. The result showed that radiation and convection are the pivotal
factors in the propagation process, while the proportion of heat conduction is very low. The
SOCs were 80% and 100% batteries, and the critical spacing trigger propagation was 4 mm
and 6 mm, respectively. Huang et al. [15] conducted a full-scale heating experiment on an
energy storage battery module to analyze the thermal behavior of the battery module. They
used the classical Semenov and Frank-Kamenetskii model input to analyze the triggering
temperature of the battery and delay heat propagation time, etc. to explore the causes of
fire and explosion.
Experiments and models are both vital research methods in the study of thermal
propagation and inhibition of thermal runaway propagation [16–18]. Models have great
advantage for the study of complex modules and battery packs, but their use for battery
thermal propagation is limited at present. They are mostly used to explore thermal runaway
in simple modules instead of complex modules [19–21]. Moreover, there are few studies on
lithium iron phosphate batteries with a single battery capacity exceeding 150 Ah [22,23].
With the development trend to larger battery capacity, it is necessary to carry out research
on large-capacity batteries.
In this paper, a series of four parallel simple modules was experimentally studied, and
the accuracy of the thermal runaway propagation model was verified by the experimental
data. Then, the thermal runaway propagation law of a complex module was simulated, and
the heat diffusion law after thermal runaway of complex modules was revealed, and the
best insulation thickness was determined. The research can provide a technical reference
for the safe design of battery packs.

2. Experiments
2.1. Battery Cell
The single battery used in this experiment is a lithium iron phosphate 173 Ah square
battery with rated voltage of 3.2 V. The size of the single battery is 41 × 174 × 207 mm,
weighing 3.25 kg, and the voltage is up to 3.65 V. Table 1 shows the relevant information of
the experimental battery.

Table 1. Information about the experimental battery.

Specification Information
Mass (kg) 3.25
Anode material Graphite (purity 99.5%)
Cathode material LiFePO4
Size (mm) 41 × 174 × 207
Rated capacity (Ah) 173
Rated voltage (V) 3.2
Cut-off voltage (V) 3.65
The SOC of module 0.5

2.2. Adiabatic Thermal Runaway Study

In order to study the thermal runaway propagation process of a battery module, an
adiabatic acceleration calorimeter was first used to obtain the temperature variation of the
single battery under adiabatic conditions. Figure 1 shows the adiabatic acceleration calorimeter.
Before the experiment, the thermocouple was calibrated and drift-tested. The operating mode

Processes 2023, 11, 1321
2.2. Adiabatic Thermal Runaway Study
In order to study the thermal runaway propagation process of a battery module, an
adiabatic acceleration calorimeter was first used to obtain the temperature variation of the 3 of 14
single battery under adiabatic conditions. Figure 1 shows the adiabatic acceleration calo-
rimeter. Before the experiment, the thermocouple was calibrated and drift-tested. The op-
erating mode of the adiabatic acceleration calorimeter was “heating–waiting–search” [24–
of the adiabatic acceleration calorimeter was “heating–waiting–search” [24–27] to ensure
27] to ensure that the battery was always kept in an adiabatic state during the whole ex-
that the battery was always kept in an adiabatic state during the whole experiment, so the
periment, so therise
temperature temperature rise all
of the battery of the
camebattery
from all
thecame from the self-generated
self-generated heat ofThe
heat of the battery.
thetemperature
battery. The rising
temperature rising rate of the battery obtained in the experiment was
rate of the battery obtained in the experiment was used to establish usedthe
to establish the subsequent 3D thermal
subsequent 3D thermal propagation model. propagation model.

Figure
Figure 1. Photo
1. Photo of adiabatic
of adiabatic accelerated
accelerated calorimeter.
calorimeter.
2.3. Thermal Propagation Test of Battery
2.3. Thermal Propagation Test of Battery
The experimental module was composed of four individual batteries, as shown in
The experimental
Figure 2. The experiment modulewas wascarried
composed
out of
in four individual batteries,
an explosion-proof box. as A shown in
mica heater
Figure 2. The experiment was carried out in an explosion-proof box.
(165 mm × 195 mm × 1 mm) with a heating power of 960 W was used to heat battery 1. A mica heater (165
mm × 195 mm
During × 1 mm) withthe
the experiment, a heating power
batteries wouldof expand
960 W was used toafter
obviously heat thermal
battery 1.runaway
During to
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 15
theensure
experiment,
good contactthe batteries would
between the expand obviously
batteries, after thermal
so the preload was added runaway to ensure
on both sides of
good
thecontact
module. between the batteries, so the preload was added on both sides of the module.
In this experiment, 15 K-type thermocouples and 5 voltage acquisition signals were
set on the front, side, back and upper surfaces of each battery. During the experiment, the
Heating plate setting
thermocouple in the middle of the front wall of battery 1 Position
would affect thearrangement
of thermocouple heat transfer
process of the heating plate, so the thermocouple Heater in the left center of battery 1 was re-
moved. The voltage signals were collected from the four cell voltages and the total voltage
of the module.

Temperature and voltage acquisition

Figure 2. System diagram of thermal propagation experiment.

Figure 2. System diagram of thermal propagation experiment.

Battery 1 was heated15inK-type

In this experiment, the experiment.
thermocouplesAfter and
20525s,voltage
the voltage of battery
acquisition 1 plum-
signals were
meted and the temperature rose sharply, reaching 220.5 °C at the highest. The
set on the front, side, back and upper surfaces of each battery. During the experiment, the specified
thermal runaway
thermocouple temperature
in the (Tc)front
middle of the set in theofstandard
wall battery 1was
wouldnotaffect
exceeded during
the heat the process
transfer exper-
iment, that is, the temperature rise exceeded 1 °C/s and lasted for 3 s. The possible
of the heating plate, so the thermocouple in the left center of battery 1 was removed. The causes
of this phenomenon
voltage are as follows:
signals were collected from the 1. four
The cell
lithium ironand
voltages phosphate
the totalbattery
voltage safety perfor-
of the module.
mance is good, and high temperature is not likely to trigger thermal runaway; 2. Due to
the lack of insulation measures in the explosion-proof box, the released heat is lost, and
thus the temperature rise rate of 1 °C/s is not reached; 3. In the process of the experiment,
the data on the data acquisition instrument are manually read to determine whether the
thermal runaway condition is reached, which may lead to inaccurate reading; 4. The tem-
 Processes 2023, 11, 1321 4 of 14

Battery 1 was heated in the experiment. After 2052 s, the voltage of battery 1 plum-
meted and the temperature rose sharply, reaching 220.5 ◦ C at the highest. The specified
thermal runaway temperature (Tc) set in the standard was not exceeded during the experi-
ment, that is, the temperature rise exceeded 1 ◦ C/s and lasted for 3 s. The possible causes of
this phenomenon are as follows: 1. The lithium iron phosphate battery safety performance
is good, and high temperature is not likely to trigger thermal runaway; 2. Due to the lack
of insulation measures in the explosion-proof box, the released heat is lost, and thus the
temperature rise rate of 1 ◦ C/s is not reached; 3. In the process of the experiment, the data
on the data acquisition instrument are manually read to determine whether the thermal
runaway condition is reached, which may lead to inaccurate reading; 4. The temperature
collected by the thermocouple was measured at the battery surface, and the internal tem-
perature was not obtained by disassembling the battery, resulting in an inaccurate test.
However, since the thermal runaway temperature rise rate was not reached, the heating
plate was set to continue to heat battery 1 until the end of the experiment.

3. Model Building
3.1. Geometric Models and Grids
Figure 3 shows the geometric model built according to the actual size of the battery
module. The four batteries are labeled as battery 1–4, the cell battery is simplified as a single
cell, battery 1 is heated by a heating plate, and batteries 2–4 are affected by the thermal
propagation of battery 1. Since no insulation material was added between adjacent cells in
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW
the experiment, an air layer was used in the model, and its thickness was set to 2 mm. The
model can describe the real module in detail. Table 2 summarizes the physical parameters
of each component.

Figure 3. Geometric model of battery module.

Figure 3. Geometric model of battery module.

Table 2. Physical parameters of each component.

Component Table(W/m
Calorific Value 2. Physical
3) Cpparameters
(J·kg−1 ·K−1 )of each component.
ρ (kg·m−3 ) λ (W·m−1 ·K−1 )
Battery — 1060
Component Calorific Value (W/m32125.8
) x =−11.6,
Cp (J·kg−1λ·K ) λyρ=(kg·m
18.034,−3λz = 18.034
) λ (W·m−1·K
Heater 960 3280 880 34.8
Air layer — 1006.43 1.169 0.0242 λx = 1.6, λy = 18.0
Battery — 1060 2125.8
18.034
Heater 960 3280 880 34.8
Air layer — 1006.43 1.169 0.0242

3.2. Mathematical Model

The 3D thermal propagation model is established in ANYSY Fluent. Equat
summarizes the energy relation, where ΔE is an increase in battery energy, Qc is
crease in thermal runaway heat of all batteries, and Qt is the heat transfer betwe
Processes 2023, 11, 1321 5 of 14

3.2. Mathematical Model

The 3D thermal propagation model is established in ANYSY Fluent. Equation (1)
summarizes the energy relation, where ∆E is an increase in battery energy, Qc is the
increase in thermal runaway heat of all batteries, and Qt is the heat transfer between the
battery module and the environment [28]:

∆E = Qc + Qt (1)

The 3D thermal runaway propagation model of the battery module satisfies the energy
conservation equation [29], as shown in Equation (2):

∂T ∂ ∂T ∂ ∂T ∂ ∂T
ρC p = (λ ) + ( λ y ) + ( λ z ) + qV (2)
∂t ∂x x ∂x ∂y ∂y ∂z ∂z

where ρ is the average density of the battery, Cp is the average specific heat capacity of the
battery at constant pressure, ∂T/∂t is the temperature change rate of the battery, V is the
volume of the battery, qV is the volume calorific value of the battery, and the integration
of the cell volume is the heat increase in the cell due to thermal runaway, as shown in
Equation (3) [30]: y
Q= qV dV (3)

The heat generation Q mainly comes from the chemical side reaction when the battery
is experiencing thermal runaway [31,32]. Through an ARC experiment, we obtained the
temperature variation law with time when the battery is in thermal runaway. Through a
user-defined function, the average temperature of the battery during thermal runaway was
obtained by an adjust function, and the heat production of the battery was returned by
a source function. The sixth-degree polynomial was used to fit the relationship between
them, and the heating rule of a single battery was compiled into Fluent software as the
internal heat source for calculation.

3.3. Boundary Conditions

The thermal conductivity of the electric core in this model is anisotropic, that is,
λy = λz 6= λx , while the heating plate is isotropic. The related parameter values are shown
in Table 1. The third kind of boundary conditions were used for heat transfer with the
environment. The convective heat transfer coefficient between the battery module and
environment was 5 W·m−2 ·K−1 . The environment temperature was set at 10 ◦ C, which
was consistent with the experimental conditions.

3.4. Grid Division and Independence Verification

The appropriate grid quantity and partition method can not only reduce the computing
resources effectively and improve the computing speed, but can also improve the accuracy
of the calculation results. Therefore, it is necessary to verify the independence of different
numbers of grids. The number of grids ranges from 400,000 to 1.2 million, and 6 kinds of
grids were selected for calculation, and the highest temperature of thermocouple No. 3 was
taken as the standard of measurement. The maximum temperature corresponding to the
number of different grids is shown in Figure 4. When the number of grids is larger than
781,000, the temperature error difference is within 2 ◦ C, which meets the error requirement.
Therefore, 781,000 grids were selected in this study to complete the research. The specific
grid division results are shown in Figure 5.
 different
kinds ofnumbers
grids were of selected
grids. The
fornumber of grids
calculation, andranges from temperature
the highest 400,000 to 1.2ofmillion, and 6
thermocouple
kinds of grids were selected for calculation, and the highest temperature
No. 3 was taken as the standard of measurement. The maximum temperature correspond- of thermocouple
No.
ing3to
wasthetaken as the
number ofstandard
differentof measurement.
grids is shown in The maximum
Figure 4. When temperature
the number correspond-
of grids is
ing to the number of different grids is shown in Figure 4. When the
larger than 781,000, the temperature error difference is within 2 °C, which meets number of grids is
the error
larger than 781,000, the temperature error difference is within 2 °C, which meets
requirement. Therefore, 781,000 grids were selected in this study to complete the research. the error
Processes 2023, 11, 1321 requirement.
The specific Therefore,
grid division781,000
resultsgrids
are were
shown selected in this
in Figure 5. study to complete the research.
6 of 14
The specific grid division results are shown in Figure 5.

Figure 4. Maximum temperature diagram of thermocouple 3 corresponding to different grid num-

Figure
bers. 4.
Figure 4.Maximum
Maximum temperature diagram
diagramof
ofthermocouple
thermocouple3 3corresponding
corresponding
to to different
different grid
grid num-
numbers.
bers.

Figure5.5.Study
Figure Studygrid
griddivision
divisiondiagram.
diagram.
Figure 5. Study grid division diagram.
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Model Validation
Since the temperature of the center point of the large surface of a single battery was
closest to the average temperature of the battery, thermocouple No. 3, thermocouple No. 7
and thermocouple No. 11 as shown in Figure 2 were selected for comparative verification.
Figure 6 shows the comparison of the temperature variation of the three thermocouples
between the simulation results and the experiment. The comparison shows that the overall
temperature changes are basically the same, and the relative error is about 6.1%, which
can verify the validity of the model. The battery average temperature distribution when
thermal propagation occurred in the module can be obtained by simulation, as shown in
Figure 7. In battery 1, thermal runaway occurred at 2028 s after the start of simulation and
reached the highest temperature, which was about 225 ◦ C. Later, due to the convective heat
transfer with the environment, and the heat conduction between batteries and insulation
materials, the average temperature of battery 1 decreased, while the average temperature
of battery 2 kept rising. At 9958 s, battery 2 reached the highest temperature, which was
about 358 ◦ C. As can be seen in Figure 7, the time span between battery 1 and battery 2
reaching the maximum temperature was about 7930 s.
 shown in Figure 7. In battery 1, thermal runaway occurred at 2028 s after the start of s
ulation and reached the highest temperature, which was about 225 °C. Later, due to
convective heat transfer with the environment, and the heat conduction between batte
and insulation materials, the average temperature of battery 1 decreased, while the av
age temperature of battery 2 kept rising. At 9958 s, battery 2 reached the highest tempe
Processes 2023, 11, 1321 7 of 14
ture, which was about 358 °C. As can be seen in Figure 7, the time span between batter
and battery 2 reaching the maximum temperature was about 7930 s.

#3

#7 #11

Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 15

Figure 6. of
Figure 6. Comparison Comparison of experimental
experimental and
and simulation simulation
results results
of three of three thermocouples.
thermocouples.

Figure
Figure7.7.Simulation
Simulationresults
resultsofofbattery
batterymodule.
module.

4.2.Thermal
4.2. ThermalPropagation
PropagationSimulation
Simulation ofof Battery
Battery Modules
Modules with
with Different
Different Heat
Heat Insulation
InsulationThickness
In
Thickness order to analyze the influence of insulation thickness of different adjacent cells on
heatIntransmission, TSAF-0525V
order to analyze organic
the influence fireproof thickness
of insulation coating used in our previous
of different adjacent research
cells on
was selected as the heat insulation material, with thermal conductivity of 0.21 W·m −1 · K−1 ,
heat transmission, TSAF-0525V organic fireproof coating used in our previous
−1 ·K−1 and density of 1420 kg·m−3 . Through comparative analysis
research
specific
was heat as
selected of 1500 J·kginsulation
the heat material, with thermal conductivity of 0.21 W·m−1·K−1,
of the insulation thickness of 0.5 mm,
specific heat of 1500 J·kg−1·K−1 and density 1 mm,of2 1420
mm, kg·m
3 mm, −3.4Through
mm and 5comparative
mm, the temperature
analysis
variation chart of each simulation is shown in Figure 8. It can be concluded from the results
of the insulation thickness of 0.5 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm, 4 mm and 5 mm, the tempera-
that, although increasing the thickness of the heat insulation layer cannot effectively prevent
ture variation chart of each simulation is shown in Figure 8. It can be concluded from the
the thermal runaway propagation process, the insulation layer can separate the thermal
results that, although increasing the thickness of the heat insulation layer cannot effec-
runaway battery from the adjacent batteries, thereby inhibiting heat transfer between the
tively prevent the thermal runaway propagation process, the insulation layer can separate
batteries. The thicker the insulation layer is, the more obvious the inhibition effect is, and
the thermal runaway battery from the adjacent batteries, thereby inhibiting heat transfer
the longer the propagation time between the adjacent batteries.
between the batteries. The thicker the insulation layer is, the more obvious the inhibition
effect is, and the longer the propagation time between the adjacent batteries.
 of the insulation thickness of 0.5 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm, 4 mm and 5 mm, the temp
ture variation chart of each simulation is shown in Figure 8. It can be concluded from
results that, although increasing the thickness of the heat insulation layer cannot eff
tively prevent the thermal runaway propagation process, the insulation layer can sepa
the thermal runaway battery from the adjacent batteries, thereby inhibiting heat tran
Processes 2023, 11, 1321 8 of 14
between the batteries. The thicker the insulation layer is, the more obvious the inhibi
effect is, and the longer the propagation time between the adjacent batteries.

Figure 8. Average temperature

Figure variation
8. Average of cells
temperature with different
variation of cells heat
withinsulation thicknesses.
different heat insulation thicknesses.

Simulation results show that

Simulation theshow
results complete propagation
that the complete time (maximum
propagation timetemperature
(maximum tempera
of battery 1 toof
maximum temperature of battery 4) and the average propagation time of
battery 1 to maximum temperature of battery 4) and the average propagation tim
modules with modules
different with
insulation thickness are shown in Table 3.
different insulation thickness are shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Comparison of propagation time with different insulation layer thicknesses.

Insulation Layer Complete Propagation

Average Propagation Time/s
Thickness/mm Time/s
0.5 11,846 3948.7
1 12,366 4122
2 15,396 5132
3 18,496 6165.3
4 18,974 6324.7
5 21,842 7280.7

With the increase in the thickness of the insulation layer, the propagation time between
batteries 1 and 2 and between batteries 2 and 3 increased, but the propagation time between
batteries 3 and 4 was less affected by the thickness of the insulation layer. From the analysis
of the thickness of each insulation layer, it is obvious that the thermal propagation transfer
time of battery 1 to battery 2 was longer than that of battery 2 to battery3 and battery 3
to battery 4, due to thermal runaway in battery 1. The average temperature of batteries
2, 3 and 4 was still relatively low, so the temperature rise of battery 2 was relatively slow.
When thermal runaway happened in battery 2, the average temperature of batteries 3 and 4
reached a high level. It can be concluded that when the cell module increases, the thermal
propagation time of the late cell is shortened. Therefore, shortening the heat propagation
time from battery 1 to battery 2 can effectively delay the thermal runaway propagation
process of the whole battery module.
According to the relationship between heat propagation and transfer time of each heat
insulation layer thickness, the analysis shows that when the thickness of the insulation layer
reaches 2 mm, the total propagation time of thermal runaway is greater than 15,000 s. If the
insulation layer is thick, it will not only reduce the energy density of the battery module, but
also prevent heat dissipation during the normal operation of the battery module, affecting
the heat dissipation performance of the battery module. In addition, it can be seen from
the Figure 9 that when the thickness of the insulation layer is 2 mm, the thermal runaway
propagation time of batteries 2 and 3 increases significantly, which can validly control the
thermal propagation time within a certain range. Therefore, the thickness of 2 mm was
selected for the subsequent complex battery module simulation study in this project.

Processes 2023, 11, 1321
tery module, affecting the heat dissipation performance of the battery module. In addition,
it can be seen from the Figure 9 that when the thickness of the insulation layer is 2 mm,
the thermal runaway propagation time of batteries 2 and 3 increases significantly, which
can validly control the thermal propagation time within a certain range. Therefore, the
thickness of 2 mm was selected for the subsequent complex battery module simulation
study in this project. 9 of 14

Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 15

Figure 9. Relationship between heat propagation and transfer time of each insulation layer thick-
ness.
Figure 9. Relationship between heat propagation and transfer time of each insulation layer thickness.
4.3. Thermal Propagation Model of Complex Cell Modules
4.3. Thermal Propagation Model of Complex Cell Modules
Based on the existing battery modules, a complex battery pack model was built, and
Basedsize
the overall on the existing
of the battery
battery modules,
pack was 597 mma complex
× 439 mm battery packBased
× 227 mm. modelonwasthebuilt, and
previous
the overall size of the battery pack was 597 mm × 439 mm × 227 mm. Based
single size, a battery module with 1 parallel and 10 series was established. The two rows on the
previous single size, a battery module with 1 parallel and 10 series was established.
of the battery modules were distributed side by side with a spacing of 10 mm. The thick- The
two rows
ness of theofinsulation
the battery modules
layer were
between distributed
adjacent side bywas
monomers side2with
mm,aand
spacing of 10 mm.
the insulation
The thickness of the insulation layer between adjacent monomers was
material was TSAF-0525V. The vents on the left and right sides of the battery module 2 mm, andwere
the
insulation material was TSAF-0525V. The vents on the left and right sides
considered in the establishment of the physical model, the size of which was 50 mm × 50 of the battery
module were considered in the establishment of the physical model, the size of which was
mm. The specific geometric model is shown in Figure 10.
50 mm × 50 mm. The specific geometric model is shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Physical

Physical model of battery
battery pack.

In this model, velocity inlet and pressure outlet were adopted. Considering
Considering the
the air
natural convection,
natural convection, 18
18 solid
solid domains
domains were
were set
set up
up internally, containing 10 battery fields
and a thermal insulation layer of eight solid domains, with physical parameter settings as
shown in Table 2. An
shown An air
air fluid
fluid domain
domain full
full of incompressible
incompressible ideal
ideal gas was
was set, and the
environment was 25 ◦ C. An internal heat source was added to each cell to describe the heat
environment was 25 °C. An internal heat source was added to each cell to describe the
generation
heat law of
generation lawthermal runaway.
of thermal runaway.

4.4. Single Battery Thermal Runaway

In the simulation, when a single battery is out of control, a UDF (user-defined func-
tion) is used to heat the battery to the highest temperature and monitor the temperature
changes of other batteries. Figure 11 shows the temperature changes of battery packs after
thermal runaway occurs in batteries 1 and 2.
When battery 1 acted as a heater, battery 2 was triggered to thermal runaway, reach-
Processes 2023, 11, 1321 10 of 14

4.4. Single Battery Thermal Runaway

In the simulation, when a single battery is out of control, a UDF (user-defined function)
is used
Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW to heat the battery to the highest temperature and monitor the temperature changes
11 of 15
of other batteries. Figure 11 shows the temperature changes of battery packs after thermal
runaway occurs in batteries 1 and 2.

Battery 1 thermal runaway Battery 3 thermal runaway

Figure
Figure11.
11.Thermal
Thermalrunaway
runawaytemperature
temperaturedistribution
distributionof
ofaasingle
singlebattery.
battery.

4.5. Multiple Battery 1Thermal

When battery acted asRunaway
a heater, battery 2 was triggered to thermal runaway, reaching
the highest temperature of 339.9 ◦ C, and then entering the cooling stage. As the temperature
When two batteries in the battery module registered thermal runaway, namely bat-
difference
teries 1 andbetween adjacent
5, it triggered thebattery
thermal2 runaway
and battery 3 diminishes,
of batteries 2 andthe temperature
4, and of battery
then caused ther-
3 was not enough to rise to its thermal runaway trigger temperature.
mal runaway of battery 3. Battery 3 reached the highest temperature of 398 °C at 8550 Therefore, seen from
s,
the simulation
while batteries 6results,
to 10 inwhen
the ybattery
direction1 acts
wereasaffected
a heater,by
it can only leadrunaway
the thermal to thermal runaway
of batteries
1ofand
neighboring battery temperature
5 and registered 2 in the x direction,
rise, butwhile thehigh
not as temperature of other temperature.
as the triggering batteries will
only rise to a certain extent.
When thermal runaway occurred in batteries 1 and 8, thermal runaway would occur in all
When
batteries, and battery
finally3inacted as a heater
all batteries of theand thermal
module. runaway
The occurred,
whole process batteries
lasted 18,6842s.and
Bat-4
reached the highest temperature of 356.9 ◦ C almost at the same time around 6800 s. Battery
teries 6 and 10 thermal runaway occurred at 10,560 s. The propagation speed of thermal
5 reachedoccurring
a maximum temperature ◦ at 14,000 s, and battery 1 reached 355.2 ◦ C
runaway inside the moduleofis403.5
faster C
than that on the edge of the battery module.
at 15,350
The s. According
temperature change toprocess
the simulation
is shown results, no thermal
in Figure 12. runaway occurred in batteries
6, 7, 8, 9 and 10.

4.5. Multiple Battery Thermal Runaway

Battery 1 and 5 thermal runaway Battery 1 and 8 thermal runaway
When two batteries in the battery module registered thermal runaway, namely bat-
teries 1 and 5, it triggered the thermal runaway of batteries 2 and 4, and then caused
thermal runaway of battery 3. Battery 3 reached the highest temperature of 398 ◦ C at 8550 s,
while batteries 6 to 10 in the y direction were affected by the thermal runaway of batteries
1 and 5 and registered temperature rise, but not as high as the triggering temperature.
When thermal runaway occurred in batteries 1 and 8, thermal runaway would occur in
all batteries, and finally in all batteries of the module. The whole process lasted 18,684 s.
Batteries 6 and 10 thermal runaway occurred at 10,560 s. The propagation speed of thermal
runaway occurring inside the module is faster than that on the edge of the battery module.
The temperature change process is shown in Figure 12.
When thermal runaway occurred in three batteries in the battery module, namely in
batteries 1, 2 and 5, thermal runaway did not occur in batteries 6 to 10. When thermal
Figure 12. Temperature
runaway occurred indistribution of 5two
batteries 1, batteries
and 10, theduring thermal
thermal runaway.
runaway speed of the modules
would be significantly accelerated. At 16,814 s, thermal runaway happened in all batteries.
ThisWhen thermal
is shown runaway
in Figure 13. occurred in three batteries in the battery module, namely in
batteries 1, 2 and 5, thermal runaway did not occur in batteries 6 to 10. When thermal
runaway occurred in batteries 1, 5 and 10, the thermal runaway speed of the modules
would be significantly accelerated. At 16,814 s, thermal runaway happened in all batteries.
This is shown in Figure 13.

Processes 2023, 11, 1321
1 and 5 and registered temperature rise, but not as high as the triggering temperature.
When thermal runaway occurred in batteries 1 and 8, thermal runaway would occur in all
batteries, and finally in all batteries of the module. The whole process lasted 18,684 s. Bat-
teries 6 and 10 thermal runaway occurred at 10,560 s. The propagation speed of thermal
runaway occurring inside the module is faster than that on the edge of the battery module.
11 of 14
The temperature change process is shown in Figure 12.

Battery 1 and 5 thermal runaway Battery 1 and 8 thermal runaway

Processes 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 15

Figure 12. Temperature distribution of two batteries during thermal runaway.
Figure 12. Temperature distribution of two batteries during thermal runaway.

When thermal runaway occurred in three batteries in the battery module, namely in
Battery 1、2 and 5 thermal
runaway batteries 1, 2 and 5, thermal runawayBattery
did 1、5
notand 10 thermal
occur in batteries 6 to 10. When thermal
runaway
runaway occurred in batteries 1, 5 and 10, the thermal runaway speed of the modules
would be significantly accelerated. At 16,814 s, thermal runaway happened in all batteries.
This is shown in Figure 13.

Figure 13. Temperature distribution of three batteries when thermal runaway occurs.
Figure 13. Temperature distribution of three batteries when thermal runaway occurs.
According to the simulation results, when a battery in a complex battery module
According
experiences to therunaway,
thermal simulation results,
if the whenbetween
distance a battery in abattery
two complex batteryismodule
modules 10 mm, ex- the
periences thermal of
thermal runaway runaway,
one batteryif the distance
will between
cause the two battery
temperature of the modules is 10tomm,
other battery rise, the
but
thermal runaway
is not likely of one
to trigger battery
thermal will cause
runaway. thereason
One temperature
for this of the other
is that batteryconductivity
the thermal to rise, but
isofnot
airlikely to trigger
is lower thermal
than that runaway.
of thermal One reason
insulation. for thisless
Moreover, is that
heatthe
is thermal conductiv-
transferred and the
spacing
ity of air between
is lower thethantwo
thatadjacent
of thermalcolumns is relatively
insulation. large,less
Moreover, so thermal runaway ofand
heat is transferred the
battery
the on the
spacing other side
between is less
the two likely to
adjacent occur. When
columns thermal
is relatively runaway
large, occursrunaway
so thermal on one side of
of the
the battery,
battery the other
on the battery will
side is eventually develop
less likely to occur. thermal runaway
When thermal over time.
runaway occurs on one
side of the battery, the battery will eventually develop thermal runaway over time.
4.6. Thermal Propagation Effect of Different Module Spacing
According
4.6. Thermal to the simulation
Propagation analysis
Effect of Different in theSpacing
Module previous section, when the distance be-
tween two rows in the battery module is 10 mm,
According to the simulation analysis in the previous when thermal
section,runaway
when theoccurs on be-
distance one
side, the
tween twosingle
rowsbattery on the other
in the battery sideisdoes
module not experience
10 mm, when thermalthermal runaway
runaway within
occurs the
on one
simulation time of 3000 s. Therefore, in order to explore the influence of spacing
side, the single battery on the other side does not experience thermal runaway within the on thermal
runaway propagation,
simulation time of 3000 s.this section continues
Therefore, in order totoexplore
simulate
the and analyze
influence the temperature
of spacing on ther-
changes at 36,000 s when the spacing is 10 mm, 9 mm and 8 mm, respectively,
mal runaway propagation, this section continues to simulate and analyze the temperature and thermal
runaway occurs in batteries 1 and 5.
changes at 36,000 s when the spacing is 10 mm, 9 mm and 8 mm, respectively, and thermal
Figure 14 shows the temperature change in each battery when the thermal runaway
runaway occurs in batteries 1 and 5.
of batteries 1 and 5 occurs at the same time and the spacing between the two columns of
Figure 14 shows the temperature change in each battery when the thermal runaway
batteries in the module is 10 mm, 9 mm and 8 mm, respectively. When the spacing is 10 mm,
of batteries 1 and 5 occurs at the same time and the spacing between the two columns of
the maximum temperature of batteries 6 and 10 reaches 385.6 ◦ C and 366.1 ◦ C, respectively,
batteries in the module is 10 mm, 9 mm and 8 mm, respectively. When the spacing is 10
at 34,250 s after the thermal runaway of batteries 1 and 5. Batteries 7 and 9 reach the highest
mm, the maximum temperature of batteries 6 and 10 reaches 385.6 °C and 366.1 °C, re-
temperature at 35,020 s, while battery 8 experiences thermal runaway at 35,636 s. When the
spectively, at 34,250 s after the thermal runaway of batteries 1 and 5. Batteries 7 and 9
reach the highest temperature at 35,020 s, while battery 8 experiences thermal runaway at
35,636 s. When the interval is 9 mm, the time when the thermal runaway reaches the max-
imum temperature of battery 10 is 31,566 s in advance. When the interval is 8 mm, the time
when thermal runaway reaches the maximum temperature of battery 10 is 29,700 s. This
 (b) (c)
Processes 2023, 11, 1321 12 of 14

interval is 9 mm, the time when the thermal runaway reaches the maximum temperature
of battery 10 is 31,566 s in advance. When the interval is 8 mm, the time when thermal
runaway reaches the maximum temperature of battery 10 is 29,700 s. This indicates that the
smaller the spacing between batteries is, the greater is the possibility of runaway thermal
propagation between modules within modules. Therefore, appropriate spacing between
battery modules can be designed according to the safety design requirements of energy
storage power stations.

Figure 14. The influence of different spacing on thermal runaway propagation: (a) 10 mm; (b) 9 mm;
(c) 8 mm.

5. Conclusions
In this paper, the influence of different insulation thickness of 173 Ah lithium iron
phosphate battery on the thermal runaway spread of a simple module and the influence of
thermal runaway on the temperature of complex battery modules when different number
of batteries experience thermal runaway were studied by experimental and simulation
methods. According to the experimental and simulation results, the following conclusions
are obtained:
1 (1) The large-capacity lithium iron phosphate battery is relatively safe. When the battery
is heated to trigger thermal runaway, the maximum temperature of the thermal
runaway is about 225 ◦ C at 2000 s after the beginning of the heating. The long
interval may be due to the low heating power of the heating plate and the low thermal
conductivity of the lithium iron phosphate battery itself.
(2) Through simulation, increasing the heat insulation layer thickness can delay the heat
propagation time of the battery module. Considering the heat insulation layer cost
and the energy density of the battery module, this study proposes that the optimal
thickness of the insulation layer is 2 mm. If the thickness of the insulation layer
is increased, the heat diffusion time will be delayed, but the insulation effect will
increase slowly.
(3) In the complex module, when the distance between the two sides is 10 mm, thermal
runaway of the battery on one side will not trigger that of the battery on the other side.
Processes 2023, 11, 1321 13 of 14

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Q.B. and K.L.; methodology, K.L. and J.L. (Jian Liu); soft-
ware, Q.B. and J.L. (Jian Liu); validation, J.L. (Jian Liu); formal analysis, K.L. and J.Z.; investigation,
Q.B.; resources, J.Z. and J.O.; data curation, J.O.; writing—original draft preparation, Q.B.; writing—
review and editing, J.L. (Jiangyan Liu); visualization, Q.B.; supervision, J.L. (Jiangyan Liu); project
administration, J.Z.; funding acquisition, K.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version
of the manuscript.
Funding: This work is supported by the NSF of China (Grant Nos. U20A20310, U1864212 and
52072052), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. 2021CDJQY-050),
National key research and development program (2021YFE0193800) and Guangdong Science and
Technology Department (Grant No. 2020B0909030001).
Informed Consent Statement: Our study didn’t involve humans.
Data Availability Statement: We’re not creating new data.
Acknowledgments: We have not received any administrative and technical support, or donations in
kind We ensure that all individuals included in this section have consented to the acknowledgement.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature

Nomenclature Nomenclature
heat transfer between battery
ρ battery density (kg/m3 ) Qt
module and environment (J)
Cp specific heat capacity (J/(kg K)) ∆E internal energy (J)
T battery temperature (◦ C) qv heat of single battery (W/m3 )
the increasing rate of
t time (s) Tc
temperature (◦ C/s)
V cell volume (m3 ) Abbreviations
heat conductivity coefficient in
λ x , λy , λz the x, y and z directions ARC accelerating rate calorimeter
(W·m−1 ·K−1 )
qh heating plate power (W/m3 ) SOC state of charge
thermal runaway heat of battery
Qc 3D three dimensional
module (J)
Te environment temperature (◦ C)

References
1. Shahid, S.; Agelin-Chaab, M. A review of thermal runaway prevention and mitigation strategies for lithium-ion batteries. Energy
Convers. Manag. X 2022, 16, 100310. [CrossRef]
2. Jin, C.; Sun, Y.; Yao, J.; Feng, X.; Lai, X.; Shen, K.; Wang, H.; Rui, X.; Xu, C.; Zheng, Y.; et al. No thermal runaway propagation
optimization design of battery arrangement for cell-to-chassis technology. Etransportation 2022, 14, 100199. [CrossRef]
3. Zhang, Q.; Liu, T.; Wang, Q. Experimental study on the influence of different heating methods on thermal runaway of lithium-ion
battery. J. Energy Storage 2021, 42, 103063. [CrossRef]
4. Zhou, Z.; Zhou, X.; Li, M.; Cao, B.; Liew, K.; Yang, L. Experimentally exploring prevention of thermal runaway propagation of
large-format prismatic lithium-ion battery module. Appl. Energy 2022, 327, 120119. [CrossRef]
5. Jin, C.; Sun, Y.; Wang, H.; Zheng, Y.; Wang, S.; Rui, X.; Xu, C.; Feng, X.; Wang, H.; Ouyang, M. Heating power and heating energy
effect on the thermal runaway propagation characteristics of lithium-ion battery module: Experiments and modeling. Appl.
Energy 2022, 312, 118760. [CrossRef]
6. Wang, H.; Xu, H.; Zhao, Z.; Wang, Q.; Jin, C.; Li, Y.; Sheng, J.; Li, K.; Du, Z.; Xu, C.; et al. An experimental analysis on thermal
runaway and its propagation in cell-to-pack lithium-ion batteries. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2022, 211, 118418. [CrossRef]
7. Chen, J.; Ren, D.; Hsu, H.; Wang, L.; He, X.; Zhang, C.; Feng, X.; Ouyang, M. Investigating the thermal runaway features of
lithium-ion batteries using a thermal resistance network model. Appl. Energy 2021, 295, 117038. [CrossRef]
8. Zhai, H.; Chi, M.; Li, J.; Li, D.; Huang, Z.; Jia, Z.; Sun, J.; Wang, Q. Thermal runaway propagation in large format lithium ion
battery modules under inclined ceilings. J. Energy Storage 2022, 51, 104477. [CrossRef]
9. Lai, X.; Wang, S.; Wang, H.; Zheng, Y.; Feng, X. Investigation of thermal runaway propagation characteristics of lithium-ion
battery modules under different trigger modes. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 2021, 171, 121080. [CrossRef]
10. Wang, W.; He, T.; He, S.; You, T.; Khan, F. Modeling of thermal runaway propagation of nmc battery packs after fast charging
operation. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2021, 154, 104–117. [CrossRef]
Processes 2023, 11, 1321 14 of 14

11. Li, Z.; Guo, Y.; Zhang, P. Effects of the battery enclosure on the thermal behaviors of lithium-ion battery module during thermal
runaway propagation by external-heating. J. Energy Storage 2022, 48, 104002. [CrossRef]
12. Hu, J.; Liu, T.; Tang, Q.; Wang, X. Experimental investigation on thermal runaway propagation in the lithium ion battery modules
under charging condition. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2022, 211, 118522. [CrossRef]
13. Wang, Z.; He, T.; Bian, H.; Jiang, F.; Yang, Y. Characteristics of and factors influencing thermal runaway propagation in lithium-ion
battery packs. J. Energy Storage 2021, 41, 102956. [CrossRef]
14. Fang, J.; Cai, J.; He, X. Experimental study on the vertical thermal runaway propagation in cylindrical lithium-ion batteries:
Effects of spacing and state of charge. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2021, 197, 117399. [CrossRef]
15. Huang, P.; Ping, P.; Li, K.; Chen, H.; Wang, Q.; Wen, J.; Sun, J. Experimental and modeling analysis of thermal runaway
propagation over the large format energy storage battery module with Li4Ti5O12 anode. Appl. Energy 2016, 183, 659–673.
[CrossRef]
16. Feng, X.; Ren, D.; He, X.; Ouyang, M. Mitigating thermal runaway of lithium-ion batteries. Joule 2020, 4, 743–770. [CrossRef]
17. Li, W.; Wang, H.; Ouyang, M.; Xu, C.; Lu, L.; Feng, X. Theoretical and experimental analysis of the lithium-ion battery thermal
runaway process based on the internal combustion engine combustion theory. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019, 185, 211–222.
[CrossRef]
18. Shelkea, A.V.; Buston, J.E.H.; Gill, J.; Howard, D.; Williams, R.C.; Read, E.; Abaza, A.; Cooper, B.; Richards, P.; Wen, J.X. Combined
numerical and experimental studies of 21700 lithium-ion battery thermal runaway induced by different thermal abuse. Int. J.
Heat Mass Transf. 2022, 194, 123099. [CrossRef]
19. Liu, F.; Wang, J.; Yang, N.; Wang, F.; Chen, Y.; Lu, D.; Liu, H.; Du, Q.; Ren, X.; Shi, M. Experimental study on the alleviation of
thermal runaway propagation from an overcharged lithium-ion battery module using different thermal insulation layers. Energy
2022, 257, 124768. [CrossRef]
20. Niu, H.; Chen, C.; Liu, Y.; Li, L.; Li, Z.; Ji, D.; Huang, X. Mitigating thermal runaway propagation of ncm 811 prismatic batteries
via hollow glass microspheres plates. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2022, 162, 672–683. [CrossRef]
21. Song, L.; Huang, Z.; Mei, W.; Jia, Z.; Yu, Y.; Wang, Q.; Jin, K. Thermal runaway propagation behavior and energy flow distribution
analysis of 280 ah lifepo4 battery. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2023, 170, 1066–1078. [CrossRef]
22. Rui, X.; Feng, X.; Wang, H.; Yang, H.; Zhang, Y.; Wan, M.; Wei, Y.; Ouyang, M. Synergistic effect of insulation and liquid cooling
on mitigating the thermal runaway propagation in lithium-ion battery module. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2021, 199, 117521. [CrossRef]
23. Liu, Q.; Zhu, Q.; Zhu, W.; Yi, X. Study on the blocking effect of aerogel felt thickness on thermal runaway propagation of
lithium-ion batteries. Fire Technol. 2023, 59, 381–399. [CrossRef]
24. He, X.; Zhao, C.; Hu, Z.; Restuccia, F.; Richter, F.; Wang, Q.; Rein, G. Heat transfer effects on accelerating rate calorimetry of the
thermal runaway of lithium-ion batteries. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2022, 162, 684–693. [CrossRef]
25. Zhao, C.; Sun, J.; Wang, Q. Thermal runaway hazards investigation on 18650 lithium-ion battery using extended volume
accelerating rate calorimeter. J. Energy Storage 2020, 28, 101232. [CrossRef]
26. Son, K.; Hwang, S.M.; Woo, S.-G.; Koo, J.K.; Paik, M.; Song, E.H.; Kim, Y.-J. Comparative study of thermal runaway and cell
failure of lab-scale li-ion batteries using accelerating rate calorimetry. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2020, 83, 247–251. [CrossRef]
27. Huang, X.; Xiao, M.; Han, D.; Xue, J.; Wang, S.; Meng, Y. Thermal runaway features of lithium sulfur pouch cells at various states
of charge evaluated by extended volume-accelerating rate calorimetry. J. Power Sources 2021, 489, 229503. [CrossRef]
28. Hong, J.; Wang, Z.; Qu, C.; Wen, J. Investigation on overcharge-caused thermal runaway of lithium-ion batteries in real-world
electric vehicles. Appl. Energy 2022, 321, 119229. [CrossRef]
29. Kong, D.; Wang, G.; Ping, P.; Xu, J. Numerical investigation of thermal runaway behavior of lithium-ion batteries with different
battery materials and heating conditions. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2021, 189, 116661. [CrossRef]
30. Jia, Y.; Uddin, M.; Li, Y.; Xu, J. Thermal runaway propagation behavior within 18,650 lithium-ion battery packs: A modeling
study. J. Energy Storage 2020, 31, 101668. [CrossRef]
31. Chen, J.; Rui, X.; Hsu, H.; Lu, L.; Zhang, C.; Ren, D.; Wang, L.; He, X.; Feng, X.; Ouyang, M. Thermal runaway modeling of
lini0.6mn0.2co0.2o2/graphite batteries under different states of charge. J. Energy Storage 2022, 49, 104090. [CrossRef]
32. Wang, L.; Ouyang, M. Thermal runaway modeling of large format high-nickel/silicon-graphite lithium-ion batteries based on
reaction sequence and kinetics. Appl. Energy 2022, 306, 117943. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.